Annemarie Reinders1, Fayrouge Reggiori, Andrew H Shennan. 1. Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Groote Schuur Hospital, Observatory, South Africa, and Maternal and Fetal Research Unit, King's College London School of Medicine, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Inaccurate blood pressure measurement has serious implications for both the patient and the health service. It results in inappropriate treatment and underestimation of clinical risk. Few automated devices have been shown to be accurate when compared with mercury sphygmomanometery. The DINAMAP ProCare has been developed to be accurate compared with an auscultatory standard. We used the International Protocol of the European Society of Hypertension to assess the accuracy of this device in an adult population. METHODS: Thirty-eight participants were recruited from outpatient clinics and staff at Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, RSA. Of these, 33 participants who fulfilled the requirements of the International Protocol were selected for final analysis. Demographic data were obtained from each participant, followed by nine sequential same-arm measurements, alternating between two trained observers and the device. The last seven readings were analysed according to the guidelines of the International Protocol. RESULTS: The ProCare Monitor achieved all the required criteria of the International Protocol by successfully passing phase 1, phase 2.1 and phase 2.2 of the study protocol. The mean difference (standard deviation) for systolic and diastolic pressures, respectively, were -2.5 (5.4) and 0.5 (4.5) mmHg, which also falls within the passing criteria for the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation Standard (ANSI/AAMI SP-10). CONCLUSION: The DINAMAP ProCare Monitor can be recommended for clinical use in an adult population.
OBJECTIVE: Inaccurate blood pressure measurement has serious implications for both the patient and the health service. It results in inappropriate treatment and underestimation of clinical risk. Few automated devices have been shown to be accurate when compared with mercury sphygmomanometery. The DINAMAP ProCare has been developed to be accurate compared with an auscultatory standard. We used the International Protocol of the European Society of Hypertension to assess the accuracy of this device in an adult population. METHODS: Thirty-eight participants were recruited from outpatient clinics and staff at Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, RSA. Of these, 33 participants who fulfilled the requirements of the International Protocol were selected for final analysis. Demographic data were obtained from each participant, followed by nine sequential same-arm measurements, alternating between two trained observers and the device. The last seven readings were analysed according to the guidelines of the International Protocol. RESULTS: The ProCare Monitor achieved all the required criteria of the International Protocol by successfully passing phase 1, phase 2.1 and phase 2.2 of the study protocol. The mean difference (standard deviation) for systolic and diastolic pressures, respectively, were -2.5 (5.4) and 0.5 (4.5) mmHg, which also falls within the passing criteria for the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation Standard (ANSI/AAMI SP-10). CONCLUSION: The DINAMAP ProCare Monitor can be recommended for clinical use in an adult population.
Authors: Aruna R Natarajan; Gilbert M Eisner; Ines Armando; Shaunagh Browning; John C Pezzullo; Lauren Rhee; Mustafa Dajani; Robert M Carey; Pedro A Jose Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2015-05-14 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Payal C Desai; Allison M Deal; Julia E Brittain; Susan Jones; Alan Hinderliter; Kenneth I Ataga Journal: Am J Hematol Date: 2012-06-20 Impact factor: 10.047
Authors: Chong Guk Lee; Hyang Mi Park; Hye Jung Shin; Jin Soo Moon; Yeong Mi Hong; Nam Soo Kim; Il Soo Ha; Myeong Jin Chang; Kyeong Won Oh Journal: Korean J Pediatr Date: 2011-11-30
Authors: Colin D Chue; Nadezhda A Wall; Nicola J Crabtree; Daniel Zehnder; William E Moody; Nicola C Edwards; Richard P Steeds; Jonathan N Townend; Charles J Ferro Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-06-18 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Tatiana M Davidson; John McGillicuddy; Martina Mueller; Brenda Brunner-Jackson; April Favella; Ashley Anderson; Magaly Torres; Kenneth J Ruggiero; Frank A Treiber Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2015-11-17